ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Proposal of an alternative way of reporting the results of comparative simulation studies.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Monte Carlo simulation studies allow testing multiple experimental conditions, whose results are often difficult to communicate and visualize to their full extent. Some researchers have proposed alternatives to address this issue, highlighting its relevance. This article develops a new way of observing, analyzing, and presenting the results of simulation experiments and is explained step by step with an example. Methods: A criterion is proposed to decide which results could be averaged and which results should not be averaged. It is also indicated how to construct Results and discussion: This Analysis Plan for reporting the results of simulation studies provides more information than existing alternative procedures, provides valuable information for method researchers, and specifies to applied researchers which statistic they should use in a particular condition. An R Shiny application is provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.